FUDU wrote:I dont disagree with that pup, if he gets convicted Im fine with that bc he did take a life. However it might not serve justice bc it might havr been self defense.

I assume you have kids, so if your kid pushed someone in the back and the other kid turned around and stuck his fist through uour kids face and proceeded to beat his ass is your kid entitled to self defense, despite being the aggressor? Legally and morally your kid has the right to self defense.

This very much breaks down to an issue of proportions and self defense, AND who are you and I to tell someone else when they have legitimate concerns of emminent danger?

Posted on a phone so Im not oing spelling or puncuation checks.

If my kid pushes someone and gets his ass kicked for it, he deserves his ass kicking.

If a kid pushes my kid, my kid kicks his ass and that kid pulls out a gun and shoots my kid, he better hope the cops find him.

My guess is you wouldn't think that if you kid ended up in the hospital from the beating though. So, from your reply, you see no relevance to equal force or disproportionate force? Am I reading you correctly? Also, you are of the opinion that any detail (no matter how significant or insig) from the moment GZ got out of his truck is irrelevant?

What if it is your kid getting pushed, is he instructed to bash the person's face in?

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:My guess is you wouldn't think that if you kid ended up in the hospital from the beating though. So, from your reply, you see no relevance to equal force or disproportionate force? Am I reading you correctly? Also, you are of the opinion that any detail (no matter how significant or insig) from the moment GZ got out of his truck is irrelevant?

What if it is your kid getting pushed, is he instructed to bash the person's face in?

Wow.

Would I be ok with it? Fuck no, it is my kid. Would i rather her gets his ass beat and goes to the hospital than he gets shot? Yes. If he started shit, got in over his head and ended up shooting the other one I would unfortunately be driving him to the local police station and handing him over.

Irrelevant? I wouldn't say irrelevant, but certainly less relevant than the dude carrying the gun got out of the vehicle. For a reason. Never going to know the real reason or his intent. But he certainly started a bad chain of events by getting out of his car. Whatever his "plan" was could have been executed by staying in his car and observing. As long as his "plan" was observation. If his plan had anything to do with harass or frighten, then he got himself into a situation in hindsight he was unable to handle. Resulting in him needed to "defend" himself with a gun.

As for the length of the beating my son would administer? All i can tell you is as a parent i will always attempt to teach my kids about consequences. I like to think i will try to arm both of my kids with as much information as possible for all kinds of situations and then do what every parent out there does every morning. Cross my fingers.

This is where you're just not getting it, nobody knows who initiated the physical confrontation, b/c it has been stated that there was nothing illegal about anything done prior to the actual shooting. This is where the concept of self defense (or imperfect self defense) enters the conversation. It matters b/c of how the law will interpret this, which can impact how the jury then applies their verdict.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

jb from the analysts reviewing this day by day I believe they have stated the judge can recommend manslaughter (if jury is feels murder is not sustainable) if the judge sees the evidence provided supporting such a manslaughter charge.

RE: what is racism & prejudice? It really is moot here, despite so much push from media and politics to make that the focus, mainly due to it being such speculation and subjective review of GZ's character. This is about the context of self defense mostly.

Question for you since you seem to be even keeled on this, what if everything transpired exactly as been presented to us, BUT TM shot and killed GZ? Now what? Does it somehow change the major focus of this case, does it bring a different focus to the actual trial and the charges? Would self defense be discussed as TM's justification for killing GZ?

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

This is where you're just not getting it, nobody knows who initiated the physical confrontation, b/c it has been stated that there was nothing illegal about anything done prior to the actual shooting. This is where the concept of self defense (or imperfect self defense) enters the conversation. It matters b/c of how the law will interpret this, which can impact how the jury then applies their verdict.

Just like you don't get basic goddamn common sense. And talking in legalese you just parrot from TV, is not impressive.

I get basic goddamn sense just fine, evidenced by the fact that I actually recognize the possibility that this could have went down either way, and recognize the importance of the process in coming to a conclusion, and that people are innocent until proven guilty, not guilty b/c the first entity to report the story told you to think that way.

Don't worry CDT GZ just might spend a lot of time in jail, and if not b/c he is acquitted he'll probably get killed by somebody that has nothing to do with this, you'll sleep just fine.

Frankly I'm confused as how you don't see two sides to this b/c you normally don't get overly subjective, you're virtually obtuse on this.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Because this whole thing is senseless and could have been prevented.

And please don't suggest that just because the verdict does come out the way I think it should, that I would be okay with Zimmerman's murder.

Agreed it could have been prevented, I see opportunities for both men to have avoided this. IMO if GZ had premeditated intentions of taking TM or anyone out that night he would have done it from afar and drove off.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:jb from the analysts reviewing this day by day I believe they have stated the judge can recommend manslaughter (if jury is feels murder is not sustainable) if the judge sees the evidence provided supporting such a manslaughter charge.

RE: what is racism & prejudice? It really is moot here, despite so much push from media and politics to make that the focus, mainly due to it being such speculation and subjective review of GZ's character. This is about the context of self defense mostly.

Question for you since you seem to be even keeled on this, what if everything transpired exactly as been presented to us, BUT TM shot and killed GZ? Now what? Does it somehow change the major focus of this case, does it bring a different focus to the actual trial and the charges? Would self defense be discussed as TM's justification for killing GZ?

I see it that way.

I maintain this is a "he said, he's dead" situation. Its really sad and needless but we'll never know what happened at the actual moments up to act once the two met.

Why wasn't manslaughter the way to go? If two guys get into a barfight, (no weapons) and one dude cracks the guy's skull in just that spot that causes brain hemorrhaging and death, do they charge that guy with Murder? I don't follow killings enough to see what is typical when one brother beats another to death. I guess like everything it depends on the prosecution.

It's perfect. I'm going to get me a pistola and next time I don't like the cut of someone's jib I'm just going to follow them around. Nothing against the law there. But, when they turn around to ask me what the fuck my problem is POW!!! shoot 'em in the face.

motherscratcher wrote:It's perfect. I'm going to get me a pistola and next time I don't like the cut of someone's jib I'm just going to follow them around. Nothing against the law there. But, when they turn around to ask me what the fuck my problem is POW!!! shoot 'em in the face.

Self defense.

Foolproof.

Are you of the opinion that it was impossible GZ could have been in position to claim and use self defense?

Frankly manslaughter is the appropriate charge here.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

Orenthal wrote:911 op is not an authority. Anyone here hear of the knockout game?

Eye witness testifies GZ on bottom (multi colored jacket was seen on bottom), GZ jacket had grass stains on the back, TM's knees had grass stains on them. 3 rather significant pieces of the puzzle to reasonably understand the concept of how self defense works and is fluid at times.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:I can ignore authorities, knowing they are on the way, chase someone down with a gun because they are "dark" and stick a pistol at them, but if they come at me and my gun their death FOR THE WIN!!! SELF DEFENSE 4 THE KLAN!!!!!